posted
Gotta get my hands on that one. I read the first one just this past summer and had thought it was a one-novel deal. The ending was very ambiguous but I thought it was just going to be left that way.
Posts: 132 | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just purchased Hidden Empire today and was wondering if I should re-read Empire first to totally get it. I want to just jump right in, but will take the time to go back and re-read Empire first if it would be better. Posts: 856 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
My wife gave me Hidden Empire, Invasive Procedures, and Keeper of Dreams for Christmas. I had them all in audio before hand but now I have them all signed
I love the look and feel and smell of a freshly opened and printed hardcover. Mmmmmm Hmmmmm.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LargeTuna: I just purchased Hidden Empire today and was wondering if I should re-read Empire first to totally get it. I want to just jump right in, but will take the time to go back and re-read Empire first if it would be better.
Just finished Hidden Empire. It's a very different book from Empire, and is not very dependent on the first book (it uses the characters who didn't die, but apart from the idea that Torrent became President as the indirect result of the Progressive War and that the big bad guy from that time is in jail and that *spoilers* Reuben died, it could work as a standalone).
I'm torn between telling you to not rush into so you can savor the good stuff and telling you to skip re-reading the prequel so you can get to the good stuff. I'll leave it at this: I read the book without having read Empire since it first came out, and I had no problem getting into OSC's narrative.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think a person is better off having read Empire first before reading Hidden Empire, for sure - although I don't know that you need to re-read it if you remember most of the first book.
But I think a new reader wouldn't full understand some things about Torrent without reading the first one, instead of only the second.
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Farmgirl: I think a person is better off having read Empire first before reading Hidden Empire, for sure - although I don't know that you need to re-read it if you remember most of the first book.
But I think a new reader wouldn't full understand some things about Torrent without reading the first one, instead of only the second.
Oh, certainly, you should definitely have read Empire before reading Hidden Empire, but I was talking about re-reading Empire to get in the mood.
Posts: 1029 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I just finished Hidden Empire. I enjoyed it up until the end. All the stuff with the plague was good, and the stuff with Cecily's son wanting to do good, and the concerns of a parent, and all that.
But then that book ended and a very short book about Torrent's plans took over, and I didn't enjoy that one very much at all.
SPOILERS
So it turns out that Palpatine, sorry, Torrent, really was Evil. Leaving aside his culpability in the Progressive War, we know for a FACT that he gave weapons to Sudanese troops so they could attack and kill sick American soldiers, and that he knew that Cecily and Mark (a 13 year old boy!) were there at the time.
He says it didn't go as planned, he thought the Americans weren't as sick as they were, they would win, blah blah blah. Fact is he gave the order to murder American soldiers. There's no way he thought no American lives would be lost.
He's a traitor to America, he's like David murdering Uriah, betraying the ones he has charge over, soldiers under his command.
And he's stupid: he actually has the EMP device proving his treason in the White House! The only reason for that is if you think people with Bones are coming to get you. If you think that, take away their Bones! Or issue Bones to the Secret Service too.
Of course this part of the book falls down completely because, if I'm not mistaken, there are PLENTY of secure places in the White House. My High School history teacher told us it's like a skyscraper in reverse; there are plenty of underground levels. There is obviously going to be a nuclear bomb shelter that the President can get into and seal up. Once warned by Cole, the President would have been in no danger, 6 guys in exoskeletons could search the White House kitchens all they wanted, they would never have found him.
What I was halfway expecting: when the jeesh shook Torrent's hand at the funeral, that they'd have figured out a way to smuggle nictovirus back into the country and infect him. Of course, that would have been stupid, because it would have spread from him to everyone in America, so I'm glad they didn't do that...
but they might have done, because they were stupid enough to get purposely infected and infect the entire base at once, and also didn't take measures to hide the fact of their infection from Torrent when they already didn't trust him, thus ensuring they were sitting ducks for any enemy attack and are therefore partially to blame for Mark's death.
So I was fine with the jeesh all getting killed because they were STUPID.
Why didn't they put together their proof and denounce Torrent, instead of trying to kill him?
Were they so dumb they don't have a folder with all the damning evidence ready to get sent out if they fail?
Is Cole really so stupid as to side with Torrent after he saw the EMP? Before then, he didn't *know* that Torrent was guilty, but that was the smoking gun, he now knows Torrent is willing to murder Americans and American soldiers to further his goals of power. And he's all right with that, because Torrent is generally (apart from being a lying treasonous murderer) a good leader?
Torrent is *directly* responsible for Mark's death.
Speaking of which, I can't believe Cecily let him stay where she knew the invaders were attacking. The kid was 13. I can reluctantly understand taking him to Africa, risking death from the virus. Even if he gets sick, he might survive. But leaving him where shooting is going to occur? I could never do that.
Once again, Aldo Verus shows up in the end of the book. This whole character is ridiculous. In the first book, we had no idea who he was until the end, a total violation of Chekov's Gun, and again here he shows up for one scene. Not good storytelling in my opinion.
All in all, the good outweighed the bad, I suppose, but the bad was pretty unappealing.
Posts: 454 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is post is thick with spoilers. If you haven't read Hidden Empire and ever intend to, then for heaven's sake, skip this post.
Parenthood is hard, isn't it? Where does the need to protect get replaced by the need to allow freedom? Many would disapprove of taking him to a plague zone in the first place (I doubt I'D have allowed a kid of mine to do what she did, for instance). But there are also times when you look at a child's situation, his motives, the pain behind him, the faith driving him, and weigh it: If I stop him, will he always regret being forbidden to try to act on his faith?
Parents make life-and-death decisions EVERY DAY. They let their daughter go out on a date with that teenage boy driving. They send that child off to college with all the beer and drugs. They let their kids ride bikes on the street - and even with a helmet, that can be fatal. They send their kids to school, a proven vector for disease.
So your kid is committed to being a good Christian, and people are dying, and he brings to you the historically valid argument that IF you believe in Christianity then you don't fear death, and so you are able and even obligated to behave in a life-risking behavior for the sake of helping others and perhaps also spreading those Christian beliefs. What do you do?
Cecily allowed him to do it, and went with him, leaving behind her other children. She did it because even if she left them orphaned because she also succumbed, that could have happened anyway because of random events. WITH CARE, the plague did not kill anywhere near as many people as the hundred percent that it first seemed to be. She did all she could to improve their odds of survival while acting out her purported faith and allowing her firstborn child to do likewise.
Adolescents crave the chance to do something REAL in the world. When they are blocked, it infantilizes them. In our society we delay adulthood FAR later than in most other societies in the history of the world. Is this of benefit? Look at our current twenty-year-olds, how long they delay committing to anything (as a group; there are always individuals who behave differently), postponing their lives in an orgy of "preparation" of dubious value. Are they better off than adolescents who made marriage and career decisions no worse than the ones made by thirty-year-olds? Are they SAFER?
I assure you, I can argue both sides of this with equal eloquence and fervor. But one thing is certain: The infinite postponement of allowing children freedom to make their own potentially dangerous decisions is devastating to the eventual adult behavior of the child. Everything must be balanced. Cecily reached her conclusion and then lived with the consequences. Would her son have lived a BETTER life, according to the beliefs she and he shared, if it had been longer but less altruistic?
That's the kind of question that I hope my readers think about and care about in reading my novels.
Posts: 2005 | Registered: Jul 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Seatarsprayan: Is Cole really so stupid as to side with Torrent after he saw the EMP? Before then, he didn't *know* that Torrent was guilty, but that was the smoking gun, he now knows Torrent is willing to murder Americans and American soldiers to further his goals of power. And he's all right with that, because Torrent is generally (apart from being a lying treasonous murderer) a good leader?
It was a ridiculous choice by Cole. But I think that's why I enjoyed the ending of this book so much.
Cole made a bad, bad, bad choice that *most* people would not make. *Most* people understand that an imperialistic dictator, no matter how well-intentioned, will eventually become absolutely corrupt.
Yet Cole, a student of history, sided with the would-be dictator.
That makes him an interesting character all of a sudden. I want to see how far he is willing to sell his soul down the river before he realizes what he's done...
Posts: 187 | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
